Primary Election 2011 results are in and the November 2011 General Election is just around the corner. Will the voters take the time to research and question the candidates? Or, will they vote for the candidate they deem to be the popular choice based on warm, fuzzy words of encouragement and postcards that show them to be stalwart members of the community with an attractive family tree?
There is a strong, prescient need for the former, not the latter to happen in the upcoming election. Whatcom County is truly at a crossroad to decide if they will continue on the path of costly, burdensome regulatory suffocation caused by, “Sustainable Development”, or return to a proven economic driver for private business, “Free Market Capitalism". The free markets that I refer to here are not what we have experienced for the past 2 decades, where government has micromanaged private business and caused them to become dependent upon government handouts.
The fastest growing pseudo-private businesses have learned how to bend the votes of local governments for public/private partnerships. The local governments have learned how to get state, federal, corporate and international dollars thru NGO’s, outside of the political process and these NGO’s come under the charter of the United Nations to receive their endorsements. With these endorsements the NGO’s have the “carrot and stick” to attract government and private business with favorable lending rates to achieve the goals of “Agenda 21”. The big requirement asked of government(s) is to write into local/state/federal legislation the language from “Agenda 21”. Private business is required to accept and operate their business under the apex (top down) structure of “Agenda 21”. The NGO’s write the language which your local government legislates into local ordinances with the mindset that the language will withstand 3rd party lawsuits from private citizen’s and businesses. Once this language has been approved, the NGO’s have the ability to use our tax dollars to sue us in our courts and win.
The big problem with “Agenda 21” (in my personal opinion and that of many others) is that it is the driver to place “Socialism” on to a global platform. Agenda 21 is a grandiose scheme to re-distribute the wealth of nations and private business to give “social justice” to 3rd world nations and their impoverished citizens. Agenda 21 does not address the political structures of tyrannical dictatorships. In fact, Agenda 21 does pave the path of an assured two class social system; the elites and the working-class poor. I say this with confidence because within the language and goals of Agenda 21 are the words of Maurice Strong from the Earth Summit of 1992; “It is clear that current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class -- involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning, and suburban housing -- are not sustainable.” (This quote is linked to a short video from 1972 where Maurice Strong speaks about his beginning efforts to work for the de-industrialization of industrialized nations because they believed then as they do now that our lifestyles are unsustainable…”Well Mr. Strong, you’ve come a long way baby!”)
For anyone who has read the works of Friedrich Hayek, you already know that his study of socialism showed that all socialism will eventually lead back to nationalism, because it always fails to address the needs and wants of the very people it is dependent upon to support it. The known leaders of socialistic governing structures have all devolved into tyrannical elites and some have facilitated the murder of their own citizen’s because they dared to resist the tyranny and in-humane treatment of people. The most important finding of Hayek’s studies is that socialism will always fail, unless it were to be globalized. After all where will the people run to if socialism is achieved on a global scale?
So again I say, “What now Whatcom County?” It is up to We the People to become informed voters who will ask tough questions of those who seek to be our representatives. The power truly lies within our local governments and we have the ability to hold them accountable to us. Any valid candidate must know and understand what Agenda 21 is, be able to tell the voter whether they do or don’t support the goals of Agenda 21, and do they understand that the fastest way back to economic health is to remove the local government from the chains of Agenda 21?
The key is that they will must be willing to walk away from state and/or federal money that comes with strings attached to the goals of Agenda 21. You say you don’t know what Agenda 21 is? Well it is incumbent upon you to get to know Agenda 21, and I have provided a link to Tom DeWeese’s, “Agenda 21 In One Easy Lesson”, to start your journey.
Yours In Truth 
Shelly
This is why I'm voting for Pete Kremen and not Tony Larson. Right there on Tony Larson's homepage (http://getwhatcomworking.com/) he is promoting "Sustainable Environment". We all know what that means. I'm going with the guy who truly supports business, Pete Kremen.
ReplyDeleteThank you for spelling this out. Do you know idea how many more county governments across the fruited plains might have bought into this dangerous philosophy?
ReplyDeleteTo date there are about 600 County governments who are members of ICLEI or ICLEI USA. ICLEI is the forerunner of NGO's that promote Agenda 21 and there are many other entities in Whatcom County which ascribe to the same ideology, such as ReSources for a Sustainable Community, Futurewise, Transition Whatcom and Sustainable Connections.
ReplyDeleteIn response to the comment about Kremen over Larsen...Kremen signed Whatcom County up for ICLEI USA and to this day has no regrets doing so. When I said we must research and question "all" of the Candidates who wish to represent us, I really mean all of them.
Kremen (and Councilman Crawford) must be scrutinized for his actions with regards to ICLEI and his staunch desire to purchase the 8000 acres above Lake Whatcom (which is now currently held and maintained through the DNR), discontinue the managed logging of this acreage (can you say revenue loss to the Mt. Baker School District) and turn it into another Recreation Park for Whatcom County. This is going to increase the tax rates of every property owner in Whatcom County, increase the Counties liability and decrease County tax revenues. Kremen (and Crawford) has also been working with the Bureau of Land Management to create a sensitive areas between "Chuckanut Rocks", "Lummi Rocks" and "Carter Point". This has the potential to stop the Cherry Point Shipping Terminal, Commercial fishing, San Juan Charters and any other activity that could be deemed a threat to this "sensitive" area. http://www.whatcomexcavator.org/3/post/2011/08/heads-up-crawford-proposing-support-of-salazarobama-reclassification-chuckanut-rocks-lummi-rocks-and-lummi-carter-point-aug-9-agenda.html
As to what Larsen means when he uses the words "Sustainable Environment", he must be contacted and questioned about it. Larsen was the Councilman who put the brakes on the DNR land swap for the 8000 acrea park, which he called "Kremen Park". So question them both boldly, because Whatcom County cannot afford to continue down a path that will not allow for responsible, productive, manufacturing businesses to create a diverse economic mix to our community.
There is no revenue loss for the Mt Baker School District, that has already been resolved, and they have been compensated.
ReplyDeleteYou state that the Mt Baker School District will not experience a loss, but you don't say how much they've received in compensation and from where?
ReplyDeleteThe point I make here is that the timber from the logging above Lake Whatcom created/produced the funding for Mt Baker School District. If that revenue resource is not coming from income produced in a same manner, then we have increased the public debt. The taxpayers have entrusted our political representatives to spend tax dollars wisely and to decrease public expenditures to sustainable levels. This land area is already available for low impact recreation, costs the taxpayers nothing and is held to the highest environmental standards. If the land swap occurs the tax base will shrink, the tax expenses will increase, and the activity or natural disasters that occur on this land become the responsibility of the County.
The Mt Baker School District was already compensated for the loss of the Timber rights back when DNR initially assumed responsibility for the land. The tax base will not be affected, there will not be increased and while we will be on the hook for any natural disasters, we will also gain a huge economic benefit of having the land fully integrated as a park, bringing in tourists and generating revenue.
ReplyDelete